Strange game

Slow start and not much fluency then 3 goals in 6 minutes and should have had at least 3 more 2nd half before conceding,
Still a win is a win

agreed. We were awful 1st half, the shape was terrible, square pegs and round holes yet we were 3up.

Much better 2nd half, totally bossed them yet they get the only goal of the half.

Its a funny old game.

agreed. We were awful 1st half, the shape was terrible, square pegs and round holes yet we were 3up.

Much better 2nd half, totally bossed them yet they get the only goal of the half.

Its a funny old game.

I agree, for the first 30mins it felt like we had shifted everything around to find a place for the new guy (why im not keen on more loans). Once it settled I felt the next 70mins we were very good and should have scored a few more

agreed. We were awful 1st half, the shape was terrible, square pegs and round holes yet we were 3up.

Much better 2nd half, totally bossed them yet they get the only goal of the half.

Its a funny old game.

I agree, for the first 30mins it felt like we had shifted everything around to find a place for the new guy (why im not keen on more loans). Once it settled I felt the next 70mins we were very good and should have scored a few more

whitts and the new guy in a midfield 2, with gunar on the right is not going to work against better teams IMO

I thought we lacked confidence early doors but the 2nd goal seemed to settle us down no end. After that we were completely in control and i don't the peterboro fans could have complained if it finished 7-0

agreed. We were awful 1st half, the shape was terrible, square pegs and round holes yet we were 3up.

Much better 2nd half, totally bossed them yet they get the only goal of the half.

Its a funny old game.

I agree, for the first 30mins it felt like we had shifted everything around to find a place for the new guy (why im not keen on more loans). Once it settled I felt the next 70mins we were very good and should have scored a few more

whitts and the new guy in a midfield 2, with gunar on the right is not going to work against better teams IMO

I agree.

Good thing about MM is he isnt afraid to change things around

Some people on here are saying we should have scored more than 3 goals,can they please enlighten me as to why we did'nt

Some people on here are saying we should have scored more than 3 goals,can they please enlighten me as to why we did'nt

Unlucky and very good goal keeping

Some people on here are saying we should have scored more than 3 goals,can they please enlighten me as to why we did'nt

Very poor finishing

Some people on here are saying we should have scored more than 3 goals,can they please enlighten me as to why we did'nt

Hit the woodwork 3 or 4 times, couple of blinding saves from the keeper and one of the best goal line clearances I've seen all season.

We weren't at out best (particularly the first 30 mins when we were poor) but once the first goal went in the team seemed to relax and we played some decent stuff creating more clear cut opportunities than we have for a long time

agreed. We were awful 1st half, the shape was terrible, square pegs and round holes yet we were 3up.

Much better 2nd half, totally bossed them yet they get the only goal of the half.

Its a funny old game.

I agree, for the first 30mins it felt like we had shifted everything around to find a place for the new guy (why im not keen on more loans). Once it settled I felt the next 70mins we were very good and should have scored a few more

whitts and the new guy in a midfield 2, with gunar on the right is not going to work against better teams IMO

i didnt like gunnar on the right and cowie on the left. whitts was far too deep at times and we had no ball winner in the middle of the field.

in order to accom the new guy , i would go back to a 4-5-1 . gunnar in usual with whitts in middle and vukic behind miller, cowie and conway on either side then for me..

Some people on here are saying we should have scored more than 3 goals,can they please enlighten me as to why we did'nt

Hit the woodwork 3 or 4 times, couple of blinding saves from the keeper and one of the best goal line clearances I've seen all season.

We weren't at out best (particularly the first 30 mins when we were poor) but once the first goal went in the team seemed to relax and we played some decent stuff creating more clear cut opportunities than we have for a long time

the reason we didnt score more is becauase gesterde is not a goalscorer or even a striker he scored a gread header and some great flick onns but he doesnt anticipate where the balls going his touch is not the beast and cant shoot if i was him and missed them chances i would be tamping if i didnt have a hat trick

After two very poor performances it didnt surprise me that we started nervously but after a combination of luck and terrible defending for the first goal we settled pretty well.Glad to see Malky shake things up and give gestede the full 90 alongside kenny miller.
whitts was aloud to boss the game in midfield and super kev had a blinder for me,

agreed. We were awful 1st half, the shape was terrible, square pegs and round holes yet we were 3up.

Much better 2nd half, totally bossed them yet they get the only goal of the half.

Its a funny old game.

I agree, for the first 30mins it felt like we had shifted everything around to find a place for the new guy (why im not keen on more loans). Once it settled I felt the next 70mins we were very good and should have scored a few more

whitts and the new guy in a midfield 2, with gunar on the right is not going to work against better teams IMO

i didnt like gunnar on the right and cowie on the left. whitts was far too deep at times and we had no ball winner in the middle of the field.

in order to accom the new guy , i would go back to a 4-5-1 . gunnar in usual with whitts in middle and vukic behind miller, cowie and conway on either side then for me..

totally agree. against better teams we need someone in the middle who can win the ball.

I dont think we can accomodate the vuickic and 2 up front.